As Monday represented exactly one month since the tragic mass shooting in Newtown, Conn., "Piers Morgan Tonight" marked the sad occasion by continuing to encourage a national conversation on guns, firearm legislation, and school safety.

Joining the program for a live, primetime interview, Asa Hutchinson detailed some of the reasons behind the current NRA initiative to arm guards outside of America's educational institutions:

"My job is to come up with some good solutions to help our school districts and our states, to look at this. When the President comes out with his proposals, I do hope that he provides a federal partnership for providing funds for training of the armed presence in the schools to help our local school districts," said the former under-secretary of Homeland Security. "Right now, virtually every school district in America is looking at better ways to assure the safety of their children."

Noting that he can understand why many people would find the NRA's plan to seem sensible, Piers Morgan did express concern that weapons would send the wrong message, and create the wrong environment, for students and their communities:

"There is a fear that if you start loading up firearms around schoolchildren, all over America, what you're basically doing is militarizing schools. Where do you stop? You have to militarize almost everywhere that children may be, and that is everywhere," theorized Morgan. "So America becomes this kind of paramilitary country."

Hutchinson saw it differently:

"Piers, you're absolutely wrong," he stated. "We presently have resource officers that are armed, trained guards in about one-third of our schools. They're not military encampments. They're safe environments in which the children feel very secure around with that kind of protection."

I'm not sure why someone hasn't asked the folks we sent to foreign shores to defend all our rights as Americans what they think – The ones that used these weapons on a regular basis. I think you would be very surprised at their answer.

I have served and I have heard from others and we are just as divided as America on the subject. I do not own anything that looks anything like an assault weapon. If I really thought it was possible for the government to go tyrannical, I wouldn’t want an ar-15 purchased from Wal-Mart or the likes. Truth is, most of them are only chambered for the civilian 223 and will not safely shoot the military 223 round. Some do and some don’t. It isn’t a long range round anyway. Close quarter combat is bad news for everyone. Best way to stay alive is to avoid it.

How much the gun lobby pay each year to buy off politicians? Shouldn't that information be public in a democracy? What about a list of recipients and amounts? By law politicians should have to declare an interest when they speak/vote. Piers, what about a bit of 'outing'?

You continue to ask the question... "why would any civilian need an AR-15 style rifle?"

Answer:

In the case where the United States, or a specific State, is invaded, to raise a civilian militia to protect the State and themselves.
In the case where a government "becomes" tyrannical, or abusive of the citizens of which it governs, and uses its military to enforce government rule.

There is no offense like a good defense. You limit the freedom and security of the country by the same amount you limit it's citizens the ability to properly defend themselves. Properly defending yourself or your State, may require more than a single shot rifle. Citizens should be able to defend themselves to limit of force that is available to "possible" perpetrators against the welfare of the good of the People.

The People of the United States should be very weary about the "gun control" issue.

Is it more acceptable to register your gun with the FBI, than to turn your guns in?

If you register your guns, the FBI will always know where to come get them...
If you register your guns, and you don't have them when the FBI comes to get them, you'll probably go to jail...
If you register your guns, and have one not registered to you, you'll probably go to jail...
If you sell or purchase a gun without proper registration, you'll probably go to jail...
No problem, right?

Many people have died to ensure that total power over this country resides in the People and not in the government.
This country, very different than most in many ways, will be the last to fall to a tyrannical government... only as long the People hold the power to defend themselves against enemies, both foreign and domestic... that was written for a reason, and historically, anytime a government has tried to change it, the People have lost a little more of their power. If People do not maintain all power and authority over their government, then their government will run all over them... "historically speaking" of course.

1. Allow people to protect themselves against all enemies, and any weapon systems that may be used against them.
2. Give People the power to protect themselves, and encourage self reliance.
3. Stronger and more swift penalties on violent crimes.
4. Censorship of violent and immoral behavior on all things available to underage children. (movies, video games, etc.)
5. Promote self worth in an unstable life, and taking responsibility for your actions and inactions.
6. Promote God !

Not to give a theology lesson here, but people will run wild without rules and consequences... without God, there are few rules and little consequence. Could trouble be stewing in America because they have stopped making decisions in a manner pleasing to the loving God?

So, I take it that you want to match every force with an equal force, such as an AR-15 with an AR-15, and your loving God approves of this.
Don't you realize that by having laws which allow you to have such a gun, also allows others, perhaps that very person you're trying to guard against, to also have the same kind of gun? Conversely, if he is not allowed to have one, neither would you, but there wouldn't be a need for it then either. So, it still would be even, right?
But, oh! I just remembered, you're fearful of a tyrannical government, aren't you? So, now you need something like a M-16 or an AK-47 or a Heckler & Koch 416. How about a few RPG's and mortar cannon too! May as well throw in some C-4 explosives, some Anthrax, some mustard gas and nerve gas too, just for good measure. If you have a pilot's license, you should pick yourself up a Huey or a Longbow also! You're going to need all of that, if you're going up against a tyrannical government and its military might! But, remember, if you are allowed to have all of these weapons, according to your interpretation of the Second Amendment, then so is everyone else in America, including all those crazy people who want to go around killing innocent people, like yourself and your family, just for kicks. Life really sucks, doesn't it?

UNLESS, you follow the Golden Rule: DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WISH THEY DO UNTO YOU!

Now, take aim and try to blow a few holes in that argument, if you will.

Everyone is constantly talking about AR15s, they've become a symbol but there are many other infantry or infantry based weapons readily available. I know a young guy (21 or so) who came into a small inheritance. One of the first things he bought was a weapon he described to me as a 50 caliber sniper rifle. Why in the hell does he need a weapon like that? For hunting?: I don't think there are any rhinoceri (What is the plural? Darned if I know) in Oregon.

Long range shooting is a very popular sport. If he wants to pay $7 a round, more power to him. Truth is this is a very big sport and has moved into hunting. Long Range Pursuit is a show where they shoot over 1000 yds. The even have a rifle they make that is out of the box ready to shoot over 1000 yds. Shooting sports is a big thing and is even an Olympic sport.

SAME OLD CANNED SAYINGS FROM PIERS MORGAN , KILLING MACHINES, HIGH VELOCITY MAGAZINES, ASSAULT WEAPONS, WHO NEEDS ALL THESE HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES, SO SICK OF HEARING IT , BUT IF YOU SAY IT OFTEN ENOUGH , PEOPLE BELIEVE IT , AND THINK WE ARE ALL BUYING FRT LINE MILITARY WEAPONS, TREAT ALL THE PEOPLE THAT DISAGREE WITH DIS RESPECT AND CUDDLE EVERYONE THAT AGREES WITH HIM, THANK GOD WE HAVE THE NRA AND OTHERS TO STAND UP FOR US GUN OWNERS, AND ULTIMATELY HE AND THE REST WILL LOSE AS THEY SHOULD . WELCOME TO AMERICA PIERS YOU AND THE REST OF THE FOOLS WILL LOSE ,SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU ARE WRONG , OUR RIGHTS WILL NOT BE CHANGED DUE TO RHETORIC AND LIES.

That started out to be "REPEAL THE SECOND AMENDMENT!" why should owning a gun be a RIGHT and not a privilege? Does anyone seriously believe that a bunch of untrained and out of shape, poorly coordinated civilians with no logistical support much less such amenities as predator drones, tanks, and aircraft could pose any kind of a threat to the armed forces of the United States? I think in a far far less sophisticated era that was disproved in 1865.

Eventually, if this line of thinking continues, we will need armed guards at every city park, every McDonald's, every Burger King, every donut shop, etc., etc., wherever large numbers of people gather on a regular basis, because you never know where the next madman will appear with his high power rifle with its high capacity ammo clips. He could be walking down the street right now, with it hidden inside a guitar case. You simply don't know!
This insane thinking, that the NRA is advocating, has to stop. The answer is simple: get rid of these types of guns, their high capacity clips and their ammunition.
Let's limit the types of guns people are allowed to have instead. For example: If you need a rifle for hunting, you can have a six shot bolt action rifle. If you need a handgun for self-defense, you can have a six shot revolver. Neither of which have a high capacity of bullets or can be reloaded quickly like those semi-autos! Wouldn't that suffice any gun needs for the average citizen?

Wiat! Déjà vu – That's what China was like in 1996 when I was there. Armed miltary in every mall and on the streets with their trusty German Shepards.
Again, more guns IS NOT the answer. Lets first get a count on what we already have on the streets and control that first.

An assault weapon is any weapon pointed at you. I don’t care if it is a single shot shotgun. We don’t need armed guards everywhere no do we need to ban guns. The types of criminals that are committing these crimes are very specific. Young, outcast, troubled males. Why can’t we identify the people that are doing the crime and get them help. If a white guy robs a bank, we don’t run around looking for a black guy do we? Wait, that might be a bad example. Columbine wasn’t planned to be a shooting as much as an explosion that would kill hundreds. Good thing Harris wasn’t very good a bomb making. I am sure that murders in Britain still kill people.

Because it is easier to identify the weapon of choice and control that, then it is to identify the madmen that about to use such a gun in diabolical manner. Trying to pick out a madman amongst a crowd of people is like looking for a needle in a haystack. Often it is too late by the time they are spotted and the damage is already done!
Just stop and think about it. The same Second Amendment right that allows you to have a gun, also allows anyone else to have a gun. You may be a responsible gun user, but can you guarantee the same is true for every gun owner? He/she is no more a criminal than you are, until such time that he/she decides to use the gun in a criminal act.
But the key thing is if certain guns have a higher capacity to do more harm, by virtue of their ability to fire off rounds at higher rate, plus their high capacity clips that can be changed in less than 3 seconds, doesn't it make logical sense to limit those to the military and police? We must reduce the chances of these falling into the wrong hands!
Thar is the whole point of this debate.

Private establishments are expected to provide safety and protection to their costumers, not the government. If it means armed guards, so be it. People will patronize businesses whom they feel safe to go to. If I am to choose a movie theater to watch a movie, I will go to a theater that has an armed guard present.

People are forgetting what this type of weapon is designed to accomplish: (Warning-Hold your stomach.)
http://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?_adv_prop=image&fr=yhs-att-att_001&va=AR-15+ballistic+profile
Look at the 4th photo in on the top. That’s what an AR-15 is design to do. Is that the weapon you want around our schools?
Think folks? Some of the Sandy Hook childern were hit 11 times. Can you imagine what that little body looked like with 11 hits?

The M-16 or more importantly the ammunition for the M-16 is designed to wound not kill. It is full metal jacketed ammunition. Doesn’t have anything to do with the weapon. High powered rifles with hollow point ammunition are designed to take down very large animals. The 223 is really designed from the 222 varmint round for killing little prairie dogs and the like. Your gross picture only serves to disgust people and use emotional reaction to make an uneducated decision on the issue.

Dana, Your comment THANK GOD WE HAVE THE NRA AND OTHERS TO STAND UP FOR US GUN OWNERS, AND ULTIMATELY HE AND THE REST WILL LOSE AS THEY SHOULD, is frightning! That day in Conn , you gun owners won and 20 kids plus 6 adults did lose. Seems to me you are proud of that fact. I find that pathetic! Your second Amendment right does not supersedes the rights of the rest of the people. I would like to see you guns owners go face to face and tell the parents of those kids that your right to have semi's is more valuable than their kids. But you won't cause you are cowards that stand behind your guns to prove you are right. WELCOME TO AMERICA PIERS YOU AND THE REST OF THE FOOLS WILL LOSE ,SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU ARE WRONG , OUR RIGHTS WILL NOT BE CHANGED DUE TO RHETORIC AND LIES. BTW Dana, please tell me how 20 kids and 6 adults being killed by someone who used their second amendment right (yes the mother encouraged her son to use these weapons) is rhetoric and lies. Truth is they are DEAD Dana and they are dean because she was allowed to have these weapons!

Jackie, tell that to the regiment of NVA we wiped out plus Viet Cong killed in My Lai in 1968. I saw there and with M-16's all around. Not sure where you got that an M-16 doesn’t kill, only wounds. (But I will admit, an AK-47 was more reliable.)
I flew Hueys in Viet Nam and in 3 days of fighting between August 22nd and the 24th, between the ground troops and our gunships, we cleared about 1500, so the 11th Brigade told us. – About 1200 claimed by the ground troops and we got about 300 from the air. (I think the 11th fudged figures as we had 4 ships in the air and each had a Crew chief and gunner with M-60s, plus 2 Mini-guns and a 40 Mike-Mike mounted on the nose.)
I was there during TET and when we were getting overrun by Charlie, I was glad to see Snoopy put down a round in every square inch of the tree line outside our perimeter. Two runs and the fight was over.
After Snoopy left, our gunships came down from the hill and finished the job.
Believe me, these weapons are not for the faint at heart – They don’t just kill, they can destroy beyond recognition.
You are correct though, guns don’t kill people do. But why increase the opportunity?
Again I say, more guns WILL NOT fix the problem!

Tony, I stand corrected. All bullets kill, but the M14 I felt hit much harder. The FMJ also limits the kill force of the round. Of course, when you rain bullets at an object at full auto, it just destroys it. I guess what I was trying to say is that civilian rounds made to shoot animals are not legal on the battle field. When you are getting shot, all weapons are assault weapons, but to single out a specific weapon over another isn’t going to solve our issues. I don’t think Newtown is a gun problem and I also, like you don’t think guns are the solution either. Most gun deaths in America are with pistols and most of all the gun death in America is self-inflicted. Seems like a gun is the most effective way to off yourself. That is why people say having a gun in the home is so dangerous because most of the deaths from guns are to the people that own them. Sort of a sorbering thougth isn't it?

The NRA promotes installing armed guards in every school in America. While many can appreciate the gun lobby's proposal, I have concern. I know the NRA has many dues-paying members, but considering the number of schools in America (how many are there?), their dues will surely SKYROCKET if they are to fund armed guards in every school!! How do they propose they can possibly fund the "guns in every school" initiative??

I agree with you. I have no problem with posting guards in the schools and every other public place in the country, provided NRA rank and file and gun owners are willing to pay for it through taxation on their "love for guns."

If there had been ONE armed person in that school the coward monster would have stopped and taken his own life as has happened in many many other shootings that DID NOT become mass shootings because it was not a GUN FREE ZONE. There are two monsters here. One is the monster that pulled the trigger and killed those little ones. Ther other is the ARROGANT PACIFIST IDIOT who believed that a gun gree zones would keep out the monster instead of begin a magnet for that monster.

Truly if I were a parent of one of those little lost ones, I would dedicate my life to make sure there were never again a gun free zone in any school!!!!!!

Piers, You asked Asa Hutchinson what he plans on arming school guards with to go against AR-15's. Let me answer that question for him. If I was tasked with protecting an entire school from someone with an AR-15, I'd want grenades, landmines, 50 caliber machine guns and MOST OF ALL – BACKUP and a lot of it.

Yes Jackie, I think you understand. I am for gun rights, but knowing what some weapons can do to the human body, I just cannot justify or see how adding more weapons can be an answer to gun violence – Especially in the hands of an untrained gun owner.
I think we need to find the ones that are unaccounted for first.
Everyone mostly agree that it’s not just a gun issue; it’s much deeper than that.

You bring up a good point. Some people have grown up around guns and have such a respect for them that is a healthy fear. The people that have ran down and took some shooting lessons and an 8 hour course to carry a weapon can’t be responsible. I remember hunter safety courses showed the results of mistakes with a gun. I mean graphic results of injuries. I was told the other day that we don’t do that anymore? I think that is wrong. It seems that the people that don’t know guns fear them too much and the people that are carrying them around don’t fear them enough.

Mr Morgan just confirmed his anti gun sentiment by totally ignoring school safety as a least part of the solution. As for fear driving gun sales does the host of CNN stating every night that banning guns in part or in whole is the only solution and that nothing else will work influences peoples fears about being disarmed? My guess is that Mr Morgan and others who keep discussing reducing access to guns have helped to sell more guns in the last month than anyone else.

As an owner of an ar15 I would like to comment this is my go to weapon of not only me but many other when I go hog hunting. This weapon is versatile and a just a fun gun to shoot. Just because this gun looks scary does not make it any more dangerous than other gun out there. The Virginia Tech shooter killed more people then Newtown with just pistols. Magazine size does not matter all they have to do is reload. Reloading is rather easy when no can stop you. So arguing no one needs this weapon is absurd just because it looks scary.

Admittedly the looks of the weapon doesn't effect it's capability, what does is the fact that it is deliberately made light to minimize the infantryman's load. A lighter weapon means he can carry more firepower, be it ammunition, grenades or any of the other necessities of the infantryman's trade.Would you like to race me in how fast you get shots off reloading say a three round magazine (which would be sufficient for hunting) while I am using a magazine that holds a hundred rounds or even thirty? And if I am a gunman I am not that concerned about weight, figuring I am going to be dead in minutes after the action starts anyway. Oh and body armor is fairly readily available as well.. Maybe five minutes.. Can you picture an armed school teacher or principal wearing body armor all the time he/she is at the school?

Poor hog. I know people like using this weapon for hog hunting but as a hunter I have to strongly disagree with the practice. I know that hogs are viewed right in there with rats, but really? Only thing I can say is you sure could shoot up a large sounder with that many rounds.

It is amazing to see how certain people owe so much to their sponsors that are also willing to make a fool of themselves by arguing for the sake of arguing, I do not see the point how an armed people around children will do good, what kind of country are we going to become if we need that type of people in Churches, Malls and everywhere as if we were in active war? certainly this is not what the country needs... nevertheless assuming that the solution to Schools safety is armed people then the big question is how is that going to be paid, while the classess in school are increased and teachers are being fired because of budget constraints all around the country? all of the sudden putting aremed people in the schools is more important than having qualified trained teachers to elevate the level of education in the country... i would love to hear the NRA and Mr. Hutchinson say that they will pay for al that additional armed people to show their desire to really improve safety.

for one, teachers are way over paid as it is, second, i would gladly volunteer my services to stand guard at a school knowing i am protecting YOUR children. i am a proud and responsible gun owner, and i've even been privileged to go to a school with on campus police, i felt a hell of a lot safer knowing they were there! as for how the guards would be paid, well in my opinion i think the life of a child is worth it. plus you won't have a need for teachers if there were to be repeats of Sandy Hooks now would you? i think you need to think a little harder next time 🙂

Red China had a nut case go crazy and start killing children in a school a year or so ago. Unfortunately for him China tightly controlled weapons and he was forced to use a knife. Twenty two children were wounded but not one died.... Do you wonder what the tally would have been if he had an AR-15 or an AK47?

Denver......do you really think that the teachers that laid their lives out at Sandy Hook were OVER PAID!!! Yet, you think that a child's life is worth the cost of putting armed guards in schools! Your thinking is very skewed buds! .....and you think Piers is arrogant.......look in the mirror pal!

Piers Morgan you are an extremely arrogant person, how about you actually let someone finish answering your questions before you jump all over them? Guns are tools, PLAN AND SIMPLE! It takes a finger to pull the trigger! If a drunk driver kills someone in a car accident do we go running up to Ford Motor Company and say we need to ban their cars?! NO!! Cars are tools just like guns are tools. The actions of these tools are determined by the user! If anything needs to be done it is simply we need to increase funding to Mental Healthcare and we need to increase the security of our schools and public places! I am a proud gun owner and a responsible one at that, if anything is to be done it should be that the mentally ill should be getting more help, and schools, malls, theaters, etc. should be better protected and in order to do that we need to increase funding to mental healthcare and better training for police and even civilians. There was a man who walked into a restaurant and shot his ex girlfriend, everyone in the restaurant was chased into the theater across the street, the shooter was then gunned down by an off-duty cop, she shot him four times and proved that the only way to stop a bad person with a gun, is with a GOOD person WITH A GUN!!

So, why didn't the off duty cop shoot him before he shot his ex-girlfriend? Because she didn't realize he had a gun. If he never had a gun, it would have been an entirely different outcome, I'm willing to bet. Wasn't he mentally ill or something? Would there have been a way to tell if he was? Probably not. Yes, the off duty cop shot him, to save others in the restaurant, but the bottom line is two people are now dead because one of them had a gun. Guns are not the way to resolve disputes. They solve nothing! They just bring a lot of grief!

Ditto to that Bryan. That is my argument exactly. If you read the comments of the pro-gun advocates, you would begin to think that common sense is not so common anymore in America. My biggest fear is that this wil turn into a political, state by state, battle (a political football) and the innocent victims of these terrible massacres will lost in vain. That would be the most disrespectful thing we could possibly do to their memory. And shame on the politicians if they allow it to happen!

How effective could an armed guard who was located at one end of a school, say at a doorway or a classroom , be against a gunman entering at the other end of the school? To say nothing of the fact that any gunman who retained any element of sanity or planning would make sure to take out the guard first. Surprise would be on the gunman's side and probably firepower as well. What if two gunmen plan it together as at Columbine or the Washington DC snipers? One starts the action and the second lays in ambush for the guard running to the scene. And all this is to say nothing of the fact that the guards would probably be armed with pistols while the gunmen might have anything but would most likely have much more ammo than the guard. A high capacity magazine would be able to take down twenty victims in the time it would take a guard to run twenty feet. Have you looked at the size of a school lately?

Do you really think I was supporting your position there Clyde? I fail to see where anything in that post would indicate that I was ADVOCATING the use of armed guards. All I said was they would be easy targets and the first to be taken out by any shooter that had given any thought to the process.

Securiing a school is more than just placing an armed guard in the schools it is securing the campus. everyone is so focused on just one aspect of security that nothing is being done. proper security would buy time for other LEO to arrive or cause a killer to pick an easier target, regardless of any ban the threat will still be there because there is no way to rid the country of all weapons there are just to many and there will be people that will not turn them in and criminals that still retain them from wrongfull sources. so why not try and secure our children?

Clyde-
My apologies, I had you confused with Craig I think when I wrote that post. My bad,,,

By the way you might be interested in the fact that out here in Oregon a number of sheriffs, including the sheriff for Jackson County where I live have decided that they are if not above the law, sufficiently in charge of it that they can say they won't prosecute anyone who legally owns a gun no matter what the president or courts say. It seems our local sheriff considers himself more cognizant of the law than the court system. I fully intend to attend the next meeting of the county commissioners and request he be fired, since he apparently doesn't believe he should be made to do his job.

The scary thing about Oregon, for all it's rural beauty is that there seems to be two areas of sanity, Portland, (Clackamas County) and the town of Ashland at the other end of the state.

Hi Bob, apology accepted. No trouble to get confused with so many postings on these blogs. Trying to straighten out the thinking of these pro-gun advocates is like "banging your head against some mad bugger's wall" (Pink Floyd. 'The Wall').

Sounds like you got a real problem with that Sheriff. The wild, wild west is still alive and well in Oregon, eh? With 'law enforcement' like that, what you have is anarchy. Everything becomes politicized, with all of those lobbyists, etc. Keep up the good work Bob. Hold them accountable.

I live in eastern Canada by the way. Excellent gun control laws here in Canada. The US government should adopt the policies we have here. It would make a world of difference for all of you Americans.

I was stationed in St. Albans Vt. in 1967-68, 12 miles from the border, and spent a lot of time in Quebec, notably Montreal where Expo 67 was going on. I really liked Quebec. Now my wife and I trip to Vancouver and Victoria any chance we get. An old girl friend and I years ago took two weeks in the Canadian Rockies. Most beautiful and certainly free of many of the problems of the States.

So very true – especially your point .... "Most beautiful and certainly free of many of the problems of the States", where the word free can be extended to freedom, something we Canadians have and are truly proud of. An all encompassing freedom that Americans sadly do not have, as they irrationally hide in fear, trepidation and dread.

What the hell are you talking about??? What Hells Angels problem. It wasn't until 1977 that a very small chapter opened in the province of Quebec. Since then there have been minor skirmishes between small and insignificant motorcycle clubs such as the Satan's Choice, Rock Machine and the Bandidos. The Lennoxville massacre of 1985 saw 5 bikers murdered and in 2006 8 bikers were murdered – hardly a problem over the past 35 years. There are probably less than a hundred members and other than some drug trafficking issues the Hells Angels have recently been somewhat of humanitarian and benevolent group that helps raise awareness of societal issues.
Get an education buddy; do some research and catch up with reality!

What a terrifying, deadly and dangerous country is the USA. My gawd, to have students in the hallways of your schools being constantly exposed to AR15 armed security personnel. What a great way to perpetuate fear, angst and dread. I am so thankful to be a Canadian living in a country where there is basically a blanket ban on guns and weapons, where the country is a more-or-less a gun-free zone. Where I can walk the streets at night without fear. Where my children can attend school without fear and trepidation, and can BE children!. We can still purchase highly regulated rifles for hunting. But rarely is a revolver let alone a semi-automatic ever seen nor available. The only gun problem we have is guns coming up over the border from the USA, yet even that is inconsequential. Canada’s firearm homicide rate has been in free fall since the 1970s. In 1974, 273 Canadians were murdered with a gun. In 2008, despite having a higher population, guns killed 200 Canadians. Even in the past 15 years, homicides-by-rifle have dropped by 50%. Perhaps this is why we see a growing re-emigration rate of Canadians who immigrated to the United States as they rush to return home where guns, violence and homicide are not a daily fact of life nor overriding concern.

You can’t be serious?! The insularity and hegemony of your nation is central to why the rest of the world views the USA with such ignominy and abhorrence. Your total lack of comprehension of the significance of geopolitics and the singularity and benevolence of the human condition that has led to the gradual erosion and downfall of the ‘empire’.

what ever I don't care what other counties think, America does more good than bad to help the world. and it my country right or wrong. and if you have ever served the U.S. in some of these other countries you might look at America differently

what ever I don’t care what other counties think, America does more good than bad to help the world. and it my country right or wrong. and if you have ever served the U.S. in some of these other countries you might look at America differently

I do agree that the United States has done a lot of good internationally, especially in those countries where they have NOT had a physical presence yet have provided foreign aid and help and assistance in education and commerce. However, in countries where you have physically tried (through wars and invasions) to ram your view of democracy down their throats, you have NOT been successful and instead are viewed with abhorrence and hatred.

Bryan, I have seen more brains in a bottle of rabbit then there are in some of these characters. They have more lead in their heads, then they have in their bullet boxes. Or maybe they are just deaf and suffering from head trauma from all those gun blasts. Or are they trying to wear us down by either being dumb or just playing dumb?

I remember a famous song that sums it up perfectly:
"I hear the train a comin', She's comin' around the bend...." And I think you all know the rest. Pay close attention to the second verse, when you get to it America.

so lets argue and accomplish nothing lets not protect our children, lets not come up with reasonble solution because it cost money. do the anti-gunners realy want our children protected? I'm not taking a pro gun stance or anti gun stance I am taking a security stance.

Piers Morgan, same drivel different day. accidently channel changed to his show tonight after aborting his show several weeks ago. I wish he would abort America and fly home, Bloody Limey or idiot needs to go back to his home if he finds it so offensive here in the U.S. On another note, elimating guns, or even just the assualt weapon (which, really isnt an assualt rifle as the civilian version does not fire in a fully auto mode) however, making these rifles or guns illegal, will not cure the issue at hand. I doubt it would cure the deranged killings that occur by those who are mentally disturbed. Assualt rifles are not the root casue of mass killings, it is a vehical used to commit these acts, handguns can achieve the same result.as well as cars. I believe some control of firearms should be put into law however, the myopic focus on assualt rifles only serves to misdirect us from the root cause of this issue, those willing to use any form of vehicle (guns, knives, cars, or whatever!) to commit these terrible, heinous , horrific crimes. I will sell all my rifles if I am going to be labeled and viewed as a bad person for having them after all this settles down, just as Piers would like to have it. Until then, I will continue to use my rifles (assualt rifle if it pleases you) and continue to collect them. I will safe gaurd them and insure that they are locked securely away until at the point of use......for paper targets whilst I learn the fine art of aiming accurately and understanding the science behind ballistics and accuracy. Again, i will enjoy this hobby until such time as those out there who hate the thought of gun ownership and firearms convince those who dont care that guns ownership is terrible, not moral, and are bad people. At that point, when it converts to a moral majority, I will then sell my guns, rifles, whatever you want to define it as. I will then plead a case to americans about british running from thier own country should be deported back to thier country of origin for abusing his audience with incorrect and biased information without understanding the real facts between firearm types, round types, ballistics, and falsely misrepresenting gun owners and those enthustiasts of thier gun hobby. What about discussing the mentality of those who are using firearms to commit these heinous crimes and thier mental state and how to resolve this...........perhaps, these crimes would disappear if we could resolve this root cause??????

Donna, you kind of missed the consistent incorrect spellings of "assault" and "vehicle" to say nothing of punctuation and grammar. Command of the written English language is not generally looked at as important on the net where we all make typos and many who post are not exactly straight A students.
That said, the arguments made do not necessarily rely on erudite English for validity. We should look for factual and logic errors rather than "gotcha" type comments and there are surely enough of those in these arguments.
By the way I went to the online dictionary just now to make sure I had spelled "consistent" correctly 😉

The talk shows now are turn brain washing.
As the line up of all the sad story of all the kid that die, are marched by us. Than come on John Walsh another sad story, and this is the man that stood up for and worked for a man that email pages that were 16 years old, that Mark Foley that was there to help stop the exploited of children. That did so him self.
Next we got to see movie star that has no idea how to use a gun!
But the one man that said lets do some thing about this problem. That 1/3 of the school are all ready arm. Mr. Hutchinson, and was he treated as well no, he was not. He had to ask, please let me finish my answer. Fort Hood they love to bring up. Fort Hood Shooting: FBI Ignored Evidence Against Nidal Hasan For Political Correctness. So my friends see the truth from gun running to this time, what are they doing and why are they doing this?

I can't make head nor tail of it either. I'm convinced that most of these pro-gun advocates flunked grammar school.
Some of them may have their B.S., their M.S. and their Ph.D. (Bull S**t, More S**t, Piled higher and Deeper) though!

Piers Morgan really needs to learn what an assault weapon is. Meriam-webster defines an assault rifle as "any various automatic or semiautomatic rifle with large capacity magazine designed for military use". The AR-15 is a semiautomatic rifle with military cosmetics, which does not affect the operation of the firearm. The AR-15 is not designed for military use. It functions just as a rifle with a wood stock. I wish he would get his facts straight.

The CAR-15 Carbine is an M16 with a 15" barrel firing a 5.56 x 45 military round. It is obsolete and I suppose you are technically correct. It's not a military weepon.... then again I suppose an obsolete Sherman tank wouldn't qualify either....

Mr. Morgan likes to make a point about murders from guns in England. And it's logical that banning certain or all weapons for civilians will reduce murders from guns. But look up Crimes in US vs UK. It's a less safe and more violent country per capita than the US. And look up what happened to the incidence of violent crimes following weapons bans in the UK and Australia. Is this really going to make us safer?

Hello Mr. Morgan,
How about a small DMZ for the school entrance? Pass through one door, through a metal detector, to a second locked door. If you don't pass the metal detector, you don't pass through the second door. Remote control security behind plexiglass. Might cost money, but cheaper and safer than an armed guard, which is rediculously insane by the way...

I took the attack of Mr. Morgan to Mr. Hutchinson personally! I saw an attack with the idea presented about arming qualified people to guard our schools. The question is, since the NRA has made a suggestion like this, they are being bashed. However, has anyone seen the anti-gunners come back with a way to protect our children? The only thing I am hearing is to disarm America of all guns. This will work just like the Gun Free Zone is working at our schools. So, Mr. Morgan, why bash the NRA and Mr. Hutchinson? When will you bash those that are against the NRA and just ask them what they will do to protect our children. Protecting our chiildren means any activity, meaning kidnapping, pedifiles, etc.

Mr. Morgan, you also mentioned, least night, that airplanes are safe because they are banned. However, you forgot to mention that there are TSA officers and police officers manage the environment to screen passengers. So, are you stating that we should have a TSA type search and seizure as we do to at the airports? If so, as you proded Mr. Hutchinson, would you are these TSA type persons? and what would you arm them with? would they have intimidating uniforms?

Let's get real, any ban today will do nothing except to take law-abiding citizens and make then criminals. The second amendment, while there to preserve my right to bear arms, the second part of its purpose is to allow me to protect myself from a tyrannical government. Remember from our founding fathers: "If the government fears the people, you have freedom; if the people fear the government, you have tyranny!"

I support the removal of the Gun Free Zone form our schools and placing more police officers in our schools to protect our precious children just like we protect our planes!

I am a disabled veteran and will stand with the NRA until I hear a better solution (other than banning guns) from the anti-gunners!

Bob, I stated this before…I'm not sure why someone hasn't asked the folks we sent to foreign shores to defend all our rights as Americans what they think – The ones that used these weapons on a regular basis. I think you would be very surprised at their answer.
As for statistics…Remember, there are Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics!
I’m also a Viet Nam Veteran and I’m hoping you didn’t forget the real key to all of this debate…the word is “TRAINED”.
I have noticed in our area, more visibility of patrol vehicles around the school right up the street from where I live. Great!
Being a wounded veteran, you have to agree that weapons used to kill large numbers of people DO NOT belong in the hands of John Q Public.
I do agree with most of what you stated, but I’m firmly against more guns like the AR-15 in the public sector and I am very much pleased to see our law inforcement folks taking things into their own hands with more visual patrols around school yards.

If you're going to tout the "only 50 gun murders in the UK last year" as this huge point for how much safer the UK is because of their lack of guns, at least tell the whole story and compare apples to apples. First off, the US has nearly 7x the population as the UK. And sure, they had a low number of gun murders, but you had 800 homicides. Avg'd for population that is 5,600 homicides, and that number should probably be closer to 8,000 since as population density increases homicide rates. Then, we don't even consider the social economic issues that contribute to homicide rates that the US has a larger share of than the UK and you're sitting close up near the US homicide rate (total, not just guns) and you don't have any... so what does it prove, that by and large people who are inclined to commit murder do so regardless of their tool. Of course, because guns are so lethal when directed at other people if guns vastly disappeared from the US our murder rates would decline to 50 or so gun homicides a year also, but the overall number of murders would not drop to 50, 500 or even 5,000... there are 14,000 murders in the US last year and applying the UK model it seems as if it would drop it by 33%, leaving still 9,000 or so murders. Now, if currently 11,000 of those are being attributed to guns currently what does that say... people who are screwed up enough to murder another person by and large do not require a gun to fulfill their sick agendas. Yes, this may curb spree killings and as tragic and it is terrible anyone should die at the hands of another in any means, these are the outlier situations in the bigger scheme of a culture where too many people are willing do bodily harm to another regardless of the means. I don't think there are any easy answers but everyone is looking for the quick fix. Some might say "why does anyone need a gun, so why is it such a big deal to just shred them all and move on if people use them to kill others" and by the same logic one could say "let's take away your car and giant house and carbon footprint since no really NEEDS it and inevitably it leads to destruction on a much larger scale for others" or "let's outlaw alcohol since who really needs it and it contributes to death by both the user and the public" or any number of things... but this is the world we live in, and if anything this just shows how sad things have become where we constantly legislate against the 99.999999% of people who are responsible and do the right thing instead of ferreting out the people who can't and putting them into programs that allow them to make healthy decisions, be productive and enjoy the freedoms our country allows. Again, no easy answers but banning a certain gun because it is black when a hunting rifle with a wooden stock works exactly the same as it shows total ignorance of the situation and is reminiscent of the same approach that has been taken toward drug control that has been a failed policy for decades. Someone had the bright idea if you just make drug sentences longer and try to put a dent in the supply things will improve instead of working from the demand side and trying to change people's behaviors, and we all see how poorly that worked. I don't have the answers, but this issue is an indicator of a sick society as guns don't operate themselves.

As for the position of Asa Hutchinson on armed guards in every school or arming Americans in general, It is a classic state of delusion. Needing more guns to protect yourself from people with more guns.... anybody see the problem here? If someone was intending to carry out an assault with any firearm, what makes Mr. Hutchinson believe that this individual wont conceal their weapon until they just walk up and eliminate the guard themselves or they simply don't care. It is this fantasy scenario that a gun will save the day that perpetuates this warped sense of reality.

Peirs you have had a lot of people on your show discussing the pros and cons of Gun ban, some who made sense and some who need professional help. Why don't you get Australia's former Prime Minister John Howard on your show. He is a person who has been there and done that as far as implementing a ban on assualt rifles. At least he can bring some facts to the debate.

If PM manages to get John Howard on his show to talk about gun laws in Australia, he'll have to show him this video that was written by a fellow Australian that reflects the view of all law abiding gun owners down there. Enjoy!

Morgan: Are you out of questions to ask your guests? Your conversation with your guests are the same every night
when the topic is about gun in America which are why you need assault weapon, how many magazine do you need and
your beloved UK has fewer gun crime. It is pathetic that your knowledge is such limited that you can not carry a
deeper discussion.

Furthermore, reported gun crime and related injuries have more than doubled in Britain since the ban. Moreover in 2007 the EU named Britain as the most violent country in the EU block, surpassing the violent crime rates in the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and even South Africa. Morgan certainly chose a good international channel to hang out all of Britain's dirty washing for the world to see.

How can we as Christians be so outraged at shootings like Sandy Hook, when we as the the former majority did nothing about the plight that brought all this on ? We should be shocked at the children being killed by evil – but what about the 55 million babies aborted in this country since Roe vs. Wade ? We with our silence, when we were a majority, let the protected hand of God be slowly removed. The silence on Facebook speaks volumes to whats really in out hearts ? God forgive us ! amen

I grew up as a Catholic, but soon became disappointed with folks and their willingness to adopt a cafeteria-style belief. – Pick and chose which of the Ten Commandments you wish to follow.
The bible says our bodies are the temples of our soul, but regular church goers smoke, are overweight and are far from taking care of their bodies.
The bible also states to obey the law of the land, but we race around 10 to 15 MPH over the speed limit – most of the time and sneak through yellow and red lights.
I would guess God is fairly discussed with most bible beaters.
It's how you live your life, not what you preach to others.

No preaching Tony, just reality – who is speaking for the 55 million murdered babies ? Have you ever looked at the partail birth abortion procedure ? As for growing up a Catholic, I was raised a Lutheran and had it wrong until I began a personal relationship with Jesus !

Hey, Piers...I have a suggestion. Instead of talking gun control let's talk mouth control. Maybe you should go back to England and crawl back under that rock you slithered out from underneath. America's guns are what liberated us from your gun-toting, tyrannical, dictatorial king a couple of centuries ago. Remember, smart guy? Brits go home. Get the hell out of OUR America where you're not welcome!

Why isn;t anyone telling the truth about the weapons used at Newtown? An ar- 15 was not even used, it was in his mothers car. Another story about one child being shot 11 times, that is not true. A very sad day, but please do not punish MILLIONS for a sick few. The media very seldom tells the truth, that is how they keep this country divided and they sell air time. Why do you think no counrty has invaded America, except Mexicans, it is because Americans has it;s own securty THE AMERICA PEOPLE

And you guys have determined this new information how? The local town would have to be in on your little conspiracy theory. The results of the shooting would suggest the weapon used was in fact the 223 with hollow points.

Ok all you tyrannical government folks. The AR-15 is not the weapon you should be wanting. Not all shoot 223 NATO rounds like the M-16 so captured ammo is not good to shoot. Why would you want a close quarter’s combat weapon anyway? That will only get you killed for sure. The other issue is accuracy. Short barrel, lots of hot rounds down a hot barrel. Nope, you’re not shooting long range with that weapon anymore. In a spirit to try and help you out, look at the MVP predator. Now there is a weapon for all of you thinking that the government is going off the deep end. Better yet, in case that doesn’t happen, it will work really good for them poor prairie dogs.

Can't solve this problem with guns because it really isn't a gun problem.

Jackie, not for nothing, but the majority of the modern AR's are chambered for the hotter 5.56 round. The AR-15 is a fair enough weapon for both close and longer range, even with the civilian .223 rounds, provided the owner does their homework with the barrel and ammo combinations they'll use. Granted, it won't matter if they're using recovered ammo, but really, if we get to that point, it won't matter. Here's the trouble with the 'tyrannical government' scenario. It won't happen and it's not something the majority of people, even gun owners ought to be worried about. To be entirely honest, what the populace needs to be concerned with, if anything at all, is the 'emergency response' to a large scale incident. The plans currently in place would make the tin foil hat crowd blow a gasket. It's made some of the most rational people I know who do project work cache guns, ammo and MRE's and have bugout bags... We've had plenty of practice from Katrina on forward. Our government knows how to manage a crisis.

Well, even the FEMA site says to be prepared and plan on taking care of yourself for a period of time. I think my wife and I are rational people, but we too have backup power and food to last us a period of time. No, not a “doomsday prepper”, but a week without power can feel like doomsday if you know what I mean.

I don’t really have an issue with the AR-15. I figured I would just make a little fun with it. I got to admit, that MVP Predator is one really neat idea.

Piers asks what kind of message would be sent if schools had armed guards? The answer is, unfortunately, the same message that is sent when one sees all the armed people at airports, at train and subway stations, sporting events, shopping malls, banks, etc. I, for one, fail to see the difference. Too bad that this is the new reality.

Are you familiar with the UK's Public Order Act 1986, 1986 c. 64Part ISection 4A

When you called the gentleman from Gun's of America "a Incredibly a stupid man",
violate UK law prohibiting insulting speech! You should appear before the Barrister,
and serve your 6 months in jail, and pay your 2000 pound fine...

So much for you being a proper Englishman gentleman!
Your just another face, ie "a common UK criminal."

I have been a loyal CNN viewer since it's inception and although from the south, considered by many to be too liberal, however, when it comes to Piers Morgan's disingenious interviews on assault weapon sand school security requires response. I am a former teacher, law student with a masters degree in counseling psychology. I have always worked in a school with a trained law enforcement officer and a concealed caryy permit holder myself. I have been an elected official and have been surrounded by people with firearms and always felt safer with them than without. Because of miltary service and having owned and operated every type of weapon, it is so deceptive to hear Morgan say that an Ar-15 fires at a rate faster than a semi-auto pistol. Simply not true.. same rate. semi auto is semi auto. and when it sdays a armed person in school with a handgun has 1-2 or 3 rounds? What handgun has that few rounds? None. Hie asked a leading question with false premises which requires respondent to first address and correct the false premise and then when guest who disagrees begin to respond with their answer, is interrupted and prevented form responding. Piers makes huge, long factually incorrect speech under guise of a question, and then doesn't let other person speak or respond. Why even have the guest on? They are simply props to make it appear as though Morgan is engaging in journalism not just making speeches under the thinly veiled pretext of having a guest. So sad to have CNN's long and hard won reputation ruined by such an obvious lack of journalistic integrity and if you insist upon continuing this course of unprofessional and unethical programming, i must insist on getting information from a more reliable source. Thank you. Sincerely, John Newberry.

Very well said and I too thought news was news until Peirs Mrogan showed me how you can very cleverly distort it to the point of making the news what you want it to be. I haven’t been paying close attention because it is obvious to me for the first time the big difference in CNN and FOX.

Although I have some disagreements with your points, you are so VERY VERY RIGHT when it comes to Piers Morgan – to quote:

" Piers makes huge, long factually incorrect speech under guise of a question, and then doesn’t let other person speak or respond. Why even have the guest on? They are simply props to make it appear as though Morgan is engaging in journalism not just making speeches under the thinly veiled pretext of having a guest. So sad to have CNN’s long and hard won reputation ruined by such an obvious lack of journalistic integrity and if you insist upon continuing this course of unprofessional and unethical programming,"

In the beginning I initially looked forward to hearing from some of the many infamous international guests. But once I realized that the only person being interviewed is Piers himself, and his guests rarely (if ever) are able to complete a sentence let alone state their viewpoints, that is when I began tuning out.

You know I might agree with you on at least a few points had you referenced Morgan's interview with that idiot talk show host, Alex Jones. Nor are Rush Limbaugh or any of the other so called pundits, exactly paragons of journalistic virtue. To be fair MSNBC isn't any better than Fox news. CNN is in my opinion one of the few news outlets left that at least attempts to maintain journalistic integrity.

Morgan's points are not, however, to be disregarded because of his attacks on his opponents. The Liberal press is under unrelenting attack from a bunch of raving maniacs on talk radio and someone needs to provide a counter balance.I certainly have never heard FOX news give a story that is bias free. They do have good sports events however.

This comment is for Mr Piers Morgan. My country went to war over a decade ago because of a foreign country possibly developing weapons of "mass destruction". We spent billions upon billions of dollars and sacrifaced thousands of our beloved, loyal military for the sake of "supposed" weapons that were capable of killing many innocent people. We know that those weapons were never found. I propose to make an analogy with the "weapon of mass destruction" that was used to murder 27 innocent women and children in Newton, CT. Who manufactured that weapon of "mass destruction" and who was allowed to use it to senslessly murder these innocent victims? Why did our United States of America think it was justified to stop another country from developing weapons that can kill many people, spend billions to justify it, sacriface thousands of our own people and then find no proof that they even existed? We need to reflect on our policies and our "rights" to bear arms. Our own weapons of mass destruction are in our own backyard. There is absolutely no need for any private citizen in our beloved country to possess any semi-automatic weapon of "mass destruction". We have one of the most protective forces of police and national guard, sophiscated private security systems that are available in the world. We must reaasure our people and allay their fears so that we do not have to feel compelled to arm and protect ourselves from ourselves. I agree with your position on weapons possession in this country. We must limit the type of weapons that are available to the public. Our society can not tolerate nor will tolerate any more senseless murder of innocent people. Guns do not kill people, people using guns kill people, and "We the people" are producing these" Guns of Mass Destrution". It must be stopped.

Ok, guns in schools... whatever. Malls, movie theaters, college campuses, your workplace, tall buildings... all these would still be vulnerable to gun violence. Piers is right, where will it stop? We have two choices. Put armed guards everywhere (hell its a job creator, but where do the TAXES come from, hmmmm?), or do something about the ridiculous love of guns and violence we have in this country? You can't have it both ways (and if you did, you'd hate it). Get real America. if you've ever been to France, you'll see what a police state looks like, they're not messing around. They have officers armed with M-16's on nearly every corner, at every subway, and everything is well 'protected'. You really want that? Ok, that's fine, just drop me off on the nearest uninhabited island while you figure it out...

Just what have you been smoking, and when was the last time you were in France? The French don't live in a police state and certainly don't have police on every corner with M16s! The French are a free society, like ours, and according to UN statistics on a per capita basis are the 5th largest gun owning nation on the planet. Furthermore, despite the large number of guns in private circulation, the French have one of the lowest per capita homicide rates in the western world.

Yet another school shooting today in America......this time a College in St. Louis. Going to school packing a gun with the intention of killing ones fellow students appears to be the New "American favourite past time" Good luck America and may God Bless as you venture into utter chaos and unrest.

I care DEEPLY about those poor little we lost ones at Sandy Hook, but I must also never, never forget the incredible, real, and everpresent danger of losing many, many more MILLIONS to a tyranical, oppressive, monster government (right, left; sincere, malicious; one dictator, several huge bureacracies)

Personally I believe pierce is a very ignorant person not stupid or dumb but uneducated about firearms I believe having an armed guard at every school is an excellent idea just to clarify I am not a member of the NRA or any other gun affiliate Hutchinson is correct it doesn't matter what type of firearm the guard has as long as they are trained properly they can take out a shooter all it takes is one bullet just because someone has an assault rifle that doesn't mean anything also you can make the laws as tough as u want if someone wants to get their hands on a gun they are going to and if someone wants to go shoot up a school they are going to! Personally a guard at every school is more of a deterrent and if need be a defensive force. Going back to the laws do you honestly think that if a person is determined to go shoot up a school or any other place do you really think they are going to abide by the laws like I said if someone wants they will get it and pierce just to let you now guns hold a lot more than 2 or 3 bullets a revolver holds at least 6 I own several guns a and I have a handgun that holds 15 bullets and that's just one clip so all I would need to equal the same amount as a 100rd AR15 clip I'd only need to carry 7 clips which would be very easy so you really need to rethink your outlook on guns!!

From your response Craig, it looks like it's not Pierce Morgan that is an idiot – it's YOU!!! First of all, please don't reply on this forum until YOU get an education. You come off as a totally illiterate, uneducated moron. You can not construct a sentence, let alone follow any conventional grammatical rules. Second, you can't even get the facts correct. Piers Morgan knows exactly how many rounds can be carried in a revolver. Listen again, and you'll realize he was simply saying that only a few rounds will likely get off before the desired consequences. And it's mentally defective imbeciles like yourself that give need to a weapons ban. Your last moronic tirade about multiple clips is stupid and imbecilic We can only hope that you are censored.

Also if you were able to read which you clearly can't I never said he was an idiot I said he was ignorant which doesn't mean he's an idiot, stupid, or dumb it simply means that he's uneducated about firearms and what would be the best solution.

I want to congradulate the Top gun salesman of the year Peirs Morgan, I thank you for helping our economy by increasing gun sales accross america. My gun dealer friends are making record sales and their famlies can realy use the money with taxes going up. keep up the hipe so we can keep selling

TO BRYAN: Oh well excuse me Bryan I was unaware that we were being graded on our grammar and just to let you know these so called assault rifles in particular the AR15 that they want to Ban aren't even really assault rifles they just just look like one they're nothing more than a glorified hunting rifle a real assualt rifle has the capability of being able to go from a fully automatic 3 round burst and semi auto in which all assualt rifles that were only had the semi auto capability so sure go ahead let them Ban AR15's all someone would have to do is go get a hunting rifle that's semi auto and it can do the exact same amount of damage that an AR15 would do besides a majority of hunting rifles uses the same type of ammunition that the Ar15 uses so wheres the logic in it like I said before I can shoot just as many rounds with my handgun if not faster than someone with AR15 it all comes down to how fast you can pull the trigger all they are doing is wasting tax dollars that could be used for adding security in these schools putting teachers through training that want the training and allowing teachers that have a conceal carry license to be able to take their firearm to school the guns aren't the issue because a criminal doesn't care about the law if they want a gun and want to harm someone they will regardless of any laws!!

And they will regardless of how many people on the school grounds are armed. No one seems to pay attention to the fact that surprise will ALWAYS be on the side of the gunman. No guard could possibly stay alert every minute of every day unless you wish to put something like airline gate security at every school with all the expense that entails.

Tourist Killed in Florida, Prompting New Patrols
By LARRY ROHTER
Published: September 15, 1993
Sign In to E-Mail

Print

Single-Page

A British tourist driving in Florida was shot to death in an apparent robbery attempt today, the second such slaying in less than a week. Hours later Gov. Lawton Chiles, facing reports that frightened vacationers are canceling their travel plans, ordered state la...w-enforcement agencies to begin guarding all Interstate highway rest areas across Florida.

The Governor's action came only hours after a British tourist, 34-year-old Gary Colley, was shot to death at a rest stop on Interstate 10, about 35 miles east of Tallahassee, becoming the ninth foreign tourist killed in Florida in the last year. His companion, Margaret Ann Jagger, 35, was wounded in the early morning attack.

Officials also announced that because of the rash of attacks on foreign visitors in recent months, the state was indefinitely suspending its tourism advertising in the United States and abroad. Greg Farmer, Secretary of the Florida Department of Commerce, described the twin killings as "catastrophic" for tourism and said the percentage of vacation cancellations from abroad was reaching double digits. Huge Losses Feared

Your right that's why there needs to be more than one guard and have a checkpoint at the entrances but you are right if someone is bound and determined to do harm they will try their best to do so the guards would be more of a deterrent than anything.

The US is the most paranoid, violent war mongering society in the western world.Who cares about american children.Who cares about american students. Who cares about american movie goers.Let them kill each other until there are no more americans left. The rest of the civilized world can get on with there lives. A Texan that I worked with said to me that he was proud that he could kill anyone who invaded his property. I said I was proud that I never even had to worry about that happening. Have a nice society.

You should be ashamed of yourself making comments like that I do agree that we are a paranoid nation but that's what has kept us protected from foreign nations nobody deserves to be killed especially children I can't even begin to fathom what would possess you to say something like that you'll be judged one day and you'll regret the things you've said.

There has recently been an increase in programs leading to these degrees in the United States; more than twice as many of such degrees are now awarded as compared to the 1970s. In Europe, there has been a standardisation of conditions to deliver the master's degrees and most countries present degrees in all disciplines.:-"

I've seen some ultra cool stuff just lately and I needed to share that together with you, just take a look at this http://www.ciofser.net/something.php?UE9jb21tZW50K2U2eHVzd2RkdzkyZWRpZ19qN3NrOXJycUBjb21tZW50LndvcmRwcmVzcy5jb20-

Post a comment

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.